Hiring for Character: Does It Actually Predict Success?
Is hiring for character a smart leadership move—or just another corporate buzzword?
Every leader wants to build a high-performing, trustworthy team. But how do you actually assess character in hiring? And more importantly—does it even work? In Episode 4 of Leadership Explored, we dive into the complexities of hiring for values, the risks of over-relying on personality assessments, and how to truly identify the right people for your team.
The Hiring Myth We Need to Challenge
“We hire for culture fit.”
“We look for values alignment.”
“We assess character, not just skills.”
Sounds great. But here’s the reality: hiring for character is often a flawed process that reinforces bias more than it predicts success. Many organizations fall into the trap of hiring people who seem like a great fit but ultimately don’t deliver long-term value.
In this episode, we ask the tough questions:
Can we actually measure character in an interview?
Are personality tests like Myers-Briggs or DISC useful, or just feel-good tools?
Why do high performers who lack trust often become toxic team members?
Is “culture fit” just another way of hiring people who think like us?
What actually predicts long-term success in hiring?
The Problem with Personality Tests
Many organizations rely on assessments like Myers-Briggs, StrengthsFinder, or DISC to evaluate candidates. While these can be useful for self-awareness, they don’t necessarily predict who will thrive in a team environment. The danger? They often lead to hiring biases rather than meaningful insights into how someone will contribute to the team’s success.
Instead of focusing on personality types, leaders should pay closer attention to trust, adaptability, and learning agility. A person’s ability to grow, handle challenges, and work well with others is far more critical than their MBTI label.
High Performer, Low Trust = Leadership Nightmare
One of the most dangerous hiring mistakes is bringing in someone who is highly skilled but lacks trustworthiness. These individuals often create short-term wins but long-term chaos—eroding morale, damaging team cohesion, and fostering toxic work cultures.
A true leader isn’t just great at their job—they elevate the team around them. If you have to choose, a medium performer who builds trust is almost always better than a high performer who destroys it.
How to Hire Better: Focus on Behaviors, Not Hypotheticals
Most hiring processes favor confidence over competence. Candidates who “sell themselves well” often outshine those who would actually be better in the role. A key shift leaders should make: Stop asking hypothetical questions.
❌ “What would you do if a client was upset?”
✅ “Tell me about a time you handled a difficult client situation.”
Behavioral questions reveal real-world actions rather than polished, rehearsed answers. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior—not an idealized response to a hypothetical scenario.
The Future of Hiring: Culture Add, Not Culture Fit
Hiring for culture fit sounds logical, but it’s a slippery slope. When companies prioritize “fit,” they often end up hiring people who think like them, limiting diversity and fresh perspectives. Instead, consider culture add—bringing in people who challenge assumptions, introduce new ideas, and expand the team’s capabilities.
The Bottom Line: Who You Hire Shapes Your Leadership Legacy
Hiring is one of the most powerful tools leaders have. It shapes team culture, productivity, and long-term success. While character is important, we need to be thoughtful about how we assess it.
🎧 Listen to the full conversation in Episode 4 of Leadership Explored at leadershipexploredpod.com or on your favorite podcast platform.
What’s your take? Have you seen hiring for character work—or fail? Let’s continue the conversation.